Don’t you feel free, being cucked?

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/nov/30/free-love-polyamory-modern-couples

For once, the comment section has sufficient experience to call bullshit.

Vapid men, vapid sexuality. What do you expect? Literal commitment-phobes.

If Holmes had been married/divorced as often as Musk (5 including the secret divorce), there’d be tons of memes and comparisons to Elizabeth Taylor and how sad it is they ‘can’t hold down a man.’ At least hold men to a standard? Any standard!

Men fail at sex and relationships constantly. Admit it.

Elon Musk failed as a man and James Bond is a violent alcoholic.

The world is different than what movies and reddit tell you.

This “free love” bullshit is a sales pitch for guilt-tripping good women into becoming free hookers, using the feminine urge to please and marry well as a weapon against them. The best trick the “sexual revolution” pulled off was convincing women it was for them. Who is praised for being a slut in this ‘culture’?

Ruin the men as husbands, leaders, and the whole family unit fails too. There’s no female equivalent of deadbeat because there doesn’t have to be – getting to the men suffices. Tell men a wife who loves them and a legacy of children will drag them down and white men won’t be a problem in the future, they’ll go extinct. You can’t have patriarchy without patriarchs. 

The term cuckold or cuckquean must be used where appropriate too.

The men rationalize it like they’re deep for being shallow and the women…. are coerced into going along (hey, isn’t that rape?) when adultery voids any ‘marriage’ legally. Polygamists don’t mention that.

Any man who’d be the town bike should expect to be rejected (to ask someone to be your sex toy is ultimately demeaning) – however, promiscuous pop culture tells them on the contrary, STDs and issues with your mother make one more desirable!

And when women IRL avoid them, go out of their way to avoid providing even a phone number, it isn’t the way nature avoids that futile encounter in all her wisdom, it’s that the women are “shallow” or “flakes”. Sure. Sure they are, stud. Evolution must be wrong, not you!

It’s a fact men nowadays see an attractive woman and assume she is sexually available – regardless of her marital status, religion or simple preference. That is intensely creepy, it’s Brave New World. Further, many expect crass sexual attentions are a compliment (porn brainwashing) and that they feel entitled to coldly fuck at least some of the women they are aroused by, as if being attractive has a price where you owe sexual services to anyone who notices. Gee, why don’t women try to be attractive anymore?

Why were women far more attractive when that was assumed to earn monogamy? When it was respectable instead of shamed? Mystery there.

If you think this disloyalty doesn’t relate to low trust, you haven’t been paying attention.

It’s like the guys who say women who reject them must be rejecting them personally… and to prove how “nice” they are, get angry. You’ve proven they were correct to avoid you, you’re unstable, that’s proof.

Nobody wants to be the low bid in the auction.

Denying the impulse to pair bond is cruel and sex solidifies that bond biologically.

If you’re happy, you don’t shop around.

e.g.

I’ve yet to see an open relationship that isn’t painfully dysfunctional. I’m sure it probably exists, but it very much seems the exception.

Yeah …and they’re literally killing people.

Pathogenic etiology cancers, the main reason teens from the Free Love era are suddenly dropping like flies.

Naturally, true cause isn’t on the death certificate.
They want to be whores and manwhores, but they don’t want their grandkids to know.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867418303635
“We conducted the largest investigation of predisposition variants in cancer to date, discovering 853 pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in 8% of 10,389 cases from 33 cancer types.”
So far.

The wages of sin seem to be paid to the Reaper.

And don’t call the swingers, swingers. The PC term is sexual snowflake.

You’d think the slutty billionaires in Silicon Valley would fund STD treatments. All the billions mean nothing in an early grave.

The disconnect from reality is fatal.

Like how the cohab slut arrangement isn’t like “kept women” prostitution, keeping a “mistress” (from brothel madam) in an apartment, whether you call them a girlfriend or not. No wonder “try before you buy” leads to divorce.

Mixed race divorce and domestic abuse

I’m back. I decided to qualify the end of the last post. For shiggles.
Yes, there is data. I’m cracking down hard on the weebs.

“Marital Dissolution Among Inter-racial Couples”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4183451/

“Increases in interracial marriage have been interpreted as reflecting reduced social distance among racial and ethnic groups, but little is known about the stability of interracial marriages. Using six panels of Survey of Income and Program Participation (N = 23,139 married couples), we found that interracial marriages are less stable than endogamous marriages, but these findings did not hold up consistently. After controlling for couple characteristics, the risk of divorce or separation among interracial couples was similar to the more-divorce-prone origin group. Although marital dissolution was found to be strongly associated with race/ethnicity, the results failed to provide evidence that interracial marriage is associated with an elevated risk of marital dissolution.”

This is like saying cars don’t kill people, brakes do.

“As the U.S. population has grown increasingly diverse, it is important to update prior research to include interracial marriages involving Asians and Hispanics, especially given that they are more likely to intermarry (with non-Hispanic Whites) than are Blacks”

so if you’re so concerned about race, screeching at the weebs is your duty. Mudsharks already hate themselves. Asiaphiles are oddly proud of it.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=asiaphile
“The term applies to a non-Asian person particularly a white man who has yellow fever. Thinks all Asian chicks are hot, usually can’t tell the difference between a homely and a cute one just as long as she is Asian.”

I’ve posted about that before. Dick-blind.

It’s the baby prostitute of Mean Girls fame!

Thousands of years of evolution down the drain. Bet his WW2-fighting grandparents would be proud.

“In their study of multiracial identification among those with Black, Asian, or Hispanic backgrounds, Lee and Bean (2007) found that those with Black backgrounds more consistently identified as Black and not multiracial (similar to the “one-drop” rule as applied in the past), whereas those with Hispanic and, especially, Asian backgrounds exhibited more flexibility and choice in racial/ethnic identification and were more likely to identify as multiracial. Lee and Bean (2007) concluded that these patterns illustrated the salience of the color line that continues to divide Blacks from non-Blacks in U.S. society.”

So the existential risk to team white is team yellow.
If you’re being scientific.

“The homogamy perspective predicts that interracial marriages will be less stable than same-race marriages. Thus, Black-White marriages are expected to be more likely to divorce than either Black or White endogamous marriages; similarly, Asian-White marriages are expected to be more likely to divorce than either Asian or White endogamous marriages. The homogamy perspective further leads to the expectation that the stronger the racial boundary of the two groups represented in the couple, the greater the risk of divorce. Thus, Black-White marriages are expected to be at greater risk of divorce than Hispanic-White or Asian-White marriages.”

Although there is a speculated convergence (I’d guess once you control for class/money) that is similar to mixed race IQ being the mean of both sub-par parents (and so dragged lower).

“For example, he found that Chinese-White couple divorce rates fell somewhere in between divorce rates of Chinese and White endogamous marriages.”
“Similarly, Hispanic-White and Asian-White marriages would be expected to be more likely to dissolve than Hispanic or Asian endogamous marriages but less likely than White endogamous marriages”

But that hypothesis isn’t what actually happens and it’d be a more dramatic shift if you removed the religious couples from consideration, only counting those who could be allowed to divorce.

Atheists are more likely to divorce overall, but it’s hard to find studies.
Are they more likely to race mix? Probably.

OT

“Therefore, according to the ethnic convergence hypothesis, immigrant-native marriages would be expected to have divorce risks that fall between those of immigrant-immigrant marriages and native-native marriages. Also, if Hispanic and Asian interracial marriages are less likely to divorce, this could be because so many of these marriages involve immigrants. After controlling for immigration characteristics, the effects of interracial marriage should diminish for these couples”

Another thing to control, desperation to retain citizenship.

“To assess the homogamy and ethnic convergence hypotheses, it is important to control for correlated factors. Individual-level socioeconomic and demographic characteristics are associated with interracial marriage and are important predictors of divorce.”

Gold diggers gonna dig.

“Finally, while having young child(ren) has been shown to increase marital stability, this effect often decreased as the child(ren) grew older (Cherlin, 1977).”

Babies won’t protect you (actually they stress a marriage, especially if had too soon).

“In addition to the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of individuals, it is critical to control for couple-level characteristics.”

Dare you to count 10-score sexual attractiveness compared to their in-group.

That would burn.

“The homogamy perspective stresses that partner differences in any socially significant characteristics—not just race—may increase the risk of divorce, and spouses in interracial couples may differ on multiple characteristics. For example, Tucker and Mitchell-Kernan (1990) found that the age gap was larger for interracially married couples than other couples. Partners in interracial couples may also differ with respect to nativity and citizenship. Interracial marriages between immigrants and U.S.-born natives may be at greater risk of divorce because of partner differences in their reasons for entering the relationship.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Prostitution is a reason.

Kalmijn et al. (2005) found that larger cultural differences between the husband and wife increased the risk of divorce.

Breaking news: water, wet.

In addition, marriage to U.S. citizens may serve as a legal means to immigrate for many foreigners.

For that reason, no, it isn’t legal, and the other spouse has also broken the law by using that to gain power too. Technically the marriage wouldn’t count, since it was conditional as duress to defraud their nation (so also treason).

Such marriages may be motivated by the desire to obtain U.S. citizenship rather than love or companionship, as evidenced in many cases in France (Neyrand & M’Sili, 1998) and the Netherlands (Kalmijn et al., 2005).”

I ain’t sayin’ she a gold digger.. but she reaching for that green card n—er.

“Finally, group-level characteristics, such as marriage cohort, region of residence, religion, and women’s changing status, may be associated with divorce or separation (Trent & South, 1989). For example, interracial marriage has been more prevalent in the West than other parts of the country (Tucker & Mitchell-Kernan, 1990), and marital instability has been more common in the West than other regions, although this relationship has varied by race (Sweeney & Phillips, 2004) and has weakened over the years (Castro Martin & Bumpass, 1989).”

Because less get married in the first place!

The majority (93.5%) of the couples in our sample were endogamous, including 77.4% White-White, 6.4% Black-Black, 7% Hispanic-Hispanic, and 2.7% Asian-Asian couples. The remaining 6.5% of couples were interracially married (including 1% White-Black, 3.5% White-Hispanic, and 1.4% White-Asian pairings, as well as 0.6% of all types of minority-minority marriages combined).

There are far more total Asian-White couples than White-Black, if you’re going to criticize anyone.

1% mulatto vs. 4.9% genetic Asian admixture. Who’s the, ahem, “race traitor?”

Consistent with prior studies (e.g., Qian, 1997), there are distinct racial/ethnic differences in being in an interracial marriage (results not shown). Blacks are substantially less likely than Hispanics or Asians to have a White spouse (10.1% vs. 23.5% and 24.6%, respectively).”

Africans aren’t stealing da white wimmin.

Statistically. This isn’t the 19th century. Your assumptions are outdated.

Over one third of interracial couples (34.5%) involved a foreign-born person married to a U.S. native compared with just 4.2% of endogamous couples.”

Yeah. She a gold digger.
Isn’t that slave ownership?

Most slaves are sex slaves.
Made obvious in the final study here. What happens when a slave gets out of line?

“Consistent with the first homogamy hypothesis, interracial marriages are less stable: 13.7% of interracial couples compared with 9.9% of endogamous couples broke up during their SIPP panel.”

Duh.

“The descriptive results also confirm the second homogamy hypothesis in which mixed-race couples involving the most socially distant groups (e.g., Blacks and Whites) were most likely to break up: nearly 20% of Black-White couples divorced or separated compared with 13.5% of Hispanic-White couples and 8.4% of Asian-White couples.”

Hispanics are genetic Asian, that data is rigged.

Total Asian-White divorce should be 10.95%.

They should also break down by sex, so Asian Male, White Female or White Male, Asian Female for specific divorce risk per individual by demo.
If they controlled for IQ distance between the couples, that’d explain most of the divorce. Hard to steer a marriage when one party is pedaling backwards.

“For Asians, however, the results were consistent with the ethnic convergence hypothesis”

No you tortured the statistics into excluding most of the Asian population in America.
Shell games don’t impress me.

“Roughly 8.3% of Asian-White couples separated or divorced, a level that falls between the relatively high rates for White couples and the relatively low rates among Asian couples (1.4%).”

You said 8.4 earlier.

8.4/1.4 = 6x (times) the average intra-racial Asian divorce risk thanks to Asian-European miscegenation?
And they think that’s a good finding. Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining Zhang.

So this isn’t even good for the Asians with white fever. Since they’re marrying the dregs. They can’t even say it’s better for waifu.

“This may be a consequence of potential problems facing interracial couples including stress, social disapproval, and cultural differences. Furthermore, interracial couples differ from endogamous couples in important ways that may elevate the risk of divorce (such as greater age and education differences between spouses). To test this idea, we turn next to the multivariate hazards models.”

Nothing about racism and the urge to control, how weird.

Almost like they’re encouraging mixing whatever the cost.

“In general, younger age of first marriage, age and educational differences among the spouses (particularly when the husband is more than two years younger or less educated than the wife); lower levels of education (less than college); lower income; and having no or fewer young children were significantly associated with marital instability.”

So lower quality individuals choose to mix.
Groundbreaking.
Stupidity, poverty, atheist fertility predict their divorce (and decision to have wed in the first place).

“Interracial couples tend to have higher incomes and older ages at marriage (both of which are associated with lower rates of dissolution), so these characteristics cannot explain their higher levels of divorce or separation.”

I smell bullshit.
If they wed, bed and divorce like idiots…
could they be idiots? Why u no publish IQ data?

“Although, mixed marriages are also more likely to involve larger differences in age and education between spouses (consistent with the first homogamy hypothesis), which could partially explain their higher risks of marital dissolution.”

There we go.
Backpedal central.

Almost like marrying a virtual child (age gap) is unpleasant, too.

“Unexpectedly, however, the addition of controls for nativity/citizenship status did not alter the hazard ratio associated with interracial marriage.”

Huh.

“Thus far, the results support the first homogamy hypothesis, though the support was rather weak.”

Despite your best efforts to obscure it? Sure Zhang.

Interracial marriage was positively associated with marital dissolution net of couple characteristics, but this relationship was only marginally significant (p < .10).”

Still science.

“We presented the hazard ratios for race/ethnicity only, although the full models are available to interested readers upon request.”

What cover-up?

For a laugh:


All four hazard models.

“Nevertheless, the results were consistent with the second homogamy hypothesis in that the risk of marital dissolution was highest among Black-White couples, followed by Hispanic-White, minority-minority couples, and finally, Asian-White couples.”

Kek.

“Among Asians, the hazard of divorce or separation for interracial couples fell between that of Asian and White endogamous couples but the difference from White couples was not significant, thus failing to fully support Hypothesis 4. We had also hypothesized that nativity and citizenship between spouses of Hispanic and Asian interracial couples may help explain their higher risks of marital dissolution (Hypothesis 5). This idea was not fully supported because interracial marriages involving Hispanics or Asians did not experience elevated hazards of dissolution (so there were no significant differences to explain). Nevertheless, nativity and citizenship did help explain the relatively low risks of instability among Hispanic and Asian endogamous couples. When we added controls for nativity and citizenship in Model 4, the hazards for Hispanic and Asian endogamous couples increased, thereby narrowing the difference from both White couples and interracial couples. In fact, the difference between Hispanic-White and Hispanic-Hispanic couples became insignificant after controlling for citizenship and nativity in Model 4”

In short, when Trump lets the waifus out and relieves them of their fraudulent green cards, expect a lot of divorce.
MAGA.

Then again… there are other kinks to iron out.

“Among Hispanic-White couples, Hispanic husband-White wife were no more likely to dissolve than White or Hispanic endogamous couples.”

You see why religion must be controlled for.

“The contribution of this study is that it examines the instability of interracial marriage among Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians in contemporary American society, an era marked by increasing diversity and increasing prevalence of interracial marriage. Overall, although marital dissolution was found to be strongly associated with race/ethnicity, the results failed to provide evidence that interracial marriage per se is associated with an elevated risk of marital dissolution. “

No, you failed to provide evidence. You.
Shit methodology, son.

Our results do show that, on the whole, interracial marriages are less stable than endogamous marriages, even after controlling for couple characteristics.”

Uhuh.

“When we divided the results by race/ethnicity, the results were only partially consistent with the homogamy perspective.”

Despite your best efforts to minimize, consistent.
They should also study second-generation race-mixing, since the mixed tend only to reproduce with one another.

“Rather, the most consistent result was that the risks of divorce for interracial couples for all combinations (Black-White, Hispanic-White, and Asian-White) were not significantly different from those of the higher-risk origin group.”

That’s still divorce. More divorce. Quit trying to spin it.

“Even after pooling six SIPP panels together, the number of interracial couples was small, which may have contributed to the insignificant findings.”

True.

They are very abnormal, Hollywood lies.

“In our study, the effects of certain racial/ethnic combinations were similar for both men and women once controls were introduced into the models (e.g., among Asians and Hispanics).”

Appealing to “alpha” won’t work on this one.

Now for another paper I’m sure cannot be biased by one “Choi”…

Race mixing and re-marriage.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5300087/

Plot twist: The modern mudshark is a statistically divorced man remarrying Asian.

I wonder why they never mention this.

“The two most frequently crossed boundaries – those involving White-Asian and White-Hispanic couples – are more permeable in remarriages than in first marriages. Boundaries that are crossed with less frequency – those between minority groups and the White-Black boundary-are less permeable in remarriages than in first marriages. Collectively, these findings suggest that racial and ethnic sorting processes in remarriage may reify existing social distances between pan-ethnic groups. Racial and ethnic variations in how the relative permeability of boundary changes between first and higher-order marriages underscore the importance of considering a broad array of interracial pairings when assessing the ways in which changes in family structure and marital sorting behavior promote integration.”

Promote integration…

From the male (decision) side:

So white men are the race traitors.
Interesting.

White genocide, blame Yellow Fever.

Statistically.

“Tabular results also reveal that for Hispanic and Asian women, intermarriage rates are higher in remarriages than in first marriages. One-third of Asian women wed non-Asian men in their first marriage, but over half did so in remarriage”

Because they couldn’t get a white woman (again).

Hit that Wall hard, huh? Study adiposity, come on.

And it’s obvious white fever in the Asian’s case, a third!

It isn’t the race-mixing white women.
“Eight percent of White women cross ethno-racial boundaries in first marriage, as compared with 6 percent of White women who remarry.”
They seem to learn their lesson.

Table 4 shows the college brainwashing.
They definitely won’t spy on you.
“better-educated women are more likely than their educationally disadvantaged counterparts to cross racial and ethnic boundaries in marriage”
The women are brainwashed too. But it’s also seeking IQ parity, upper-class women typically went to college to find husbands, so more studies are needed and more white men allowed in the Western universities that are their birthright.

“It is conceivable that White-Hispanic and White-Asian marriages likely become even more common in remarriage when third party controls weaken following the dissolution of a first union

They ignore their family’s wishes, bad sons should be disinherited.

and previously married individuals face experience limited availability of co-ethnic potential partners (Kalmijn, 1998; Schwartz, 2013).”

LOL

Can’t get a white woman!

Right there! Ouch.

“Other scholarship claims that cultural dissimilarities between spouses increase marital conflict and instability by reducing the basis for spousal consensus and mutual understanding between spouses (Hohmann-Marriott and Amato, 2008; Kalmijn, 1998; Schwartz, 2013; Zhang and Van Hook, 2009).

resentment

Presumably, couples that exit minority-only interracial marriages avoid similar unions in remarriage, preferring instead to form remarry endogamously, to wed a White partner the next time around, or forego marriage entirely.”

Using white people, again. So the white people are also getting dregs in the arrangement.
It’s like the marital equivalent of busing kids in to improve test scores.

“Descriptive tabulations show that one-in-three women who remarried wed never-married husbands, but only one-in-ten first time brides wed previously married men.”

Yeah if he failed as a husband once, why bet on a lame horse?
He didn’t keep his vows the first time. What a catch! (Throw it back!)

“These analyses, which indicate whether in couples’ mixed marital experiences biased the estimates of boundary crossing in first and subsequent marriages, reaffirm the reported results.”

So in many mixed re-marriages, the previously married party is the dregs of their group.

“base the analyses on recent unions” K.

“Partly this resulted because many large government surveys, such as the decennial census, stopped collecting information about marital order.”

Because it makes men look bad.

“In the context of rising intermarriage and remarriage rates, our study underscores the importance of disaggregating marriage order to clarify whether, in what ways, and for which groups changes in coupling behavior promote integration. Collecting data that permits these distinctions is necessary to avoid conflating potentially divergent intermarriage trends in first and higher order unions, some of which are driven by racial and ethnic differences in divorce rates.”

Oh, they know.
Most starter marriages are male-led affairs, they think (wrongly, QED) they can always trade up later (not to be entered into lightly….) and abandoning wife #1 has no social consequences.
So re-marrying men are largely to blame for the huge divorce rates. Good to know.

This explains why they rarely make it male-led data.

“This pattern, which is consistent with past findings, suggests that low barriers to social interaction across racial and ethnic groups when coupled with suboptimal marriage market conditions and weakened third party control can facilitate interracial remarriages for these groups (Aguirre et al., 1995; Fu, 2010; Kalmijn, 1998; Schwartz, 2013).”

Random re-marriage should be illegal, it’s like flunking a driving test but serious. A society that lets adults (who should be mature enough to commit) re-marry capriciously like infinite respawns is condemning the culture, religion, spouses and children to the misery of an insecure life. What a betrayal.

They bitch about masculinity, when comes the manning-up? Men were respected when they stuck out their duties. Don’t take it on if you don’t mean it.

“Prior studies suggest that cultural dissimilarities between partners diminish grounds for spousal consensus, leading to conflictive, unstable marriages at high risk of dissolution (Hohmann-Marriott and Amato, 2008). In remarriage, previously married men and women from mixed-race unions may revise their mate criteria to avoid similar forms of partner incompatibility (Dean and Gurak, 1978).”

Except stupid white guys with yellow fever.
I wonder if they’re more likely porn addicts. That would be an entertaining study.

“Stated differently, intermarriage studies restricted to White-Black couples render an incomplete portrayal of mate selection behavior in the context of an ever more diverse society.”

They may not be getting married but they’re having more children than the white guys with Yellow Fever. It’s typical atheist sub-fertility so given the standard, limited dating patterns their grand-kids will be a quarter black.

“In similar fashion, although prior work shows that characteristics of spouses interact in shaping mate selection behavior (Fu, 2010), our data do not permit consideration of the joint distribution of spouses’ characteristics. We report analyses based on intermarriage patterns pegged to wives’ characteristics; however, auxiliary analyses based on husbands’ attributes yielded similar conclusions.”

Since the male proposes, it should be male-led data.
Look for r-selection traits and that’ll resolve most of it.

“How the mate selection behavior of widowed and divorced individuals is largely uncharted and certainly warrants investigation.”

Women are more likely to be widowed, men divorced, that’s why they don’t look for it – it makes the men look heartless.

“marriage confers legal rights and obligations, many of which are not extended to cohabiting couples (child support is a notable exception)”

It shouldn’t be, don’t have kids with someone you haven’t married first, or at least don’t expect the authority of a husband over a woman you didn’t yoke yourself to. If a man wants “his” kids so much, he should be taking primary care of them – not fobbing them off on a foreign nanny like some high-powered executive (daycare is abusive). The low IQ nanny normalization may be responsible for divorced children’s lower IQs.

“Specifically, racial and ethnic profile of former cohabiting partners are seldom recorded in US data suitable for analyzing inter-racial coupling behavior (e.g., ACS, Census, NSFG).”

coincidence

“The exclusion of interracial cohabitation will understate the extent to which couples cross ethnic and racial boundaries in forming co-residential interracial unions given that interracial unions are more likely than same-race unions to start and remain as a cohabitation (Kreider, 2000; Rodriguez-Garcia, 2015).”

Study separation.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3315595/

The variable nobody wants to discuss.

“Despite the growing number of interethnic marriages in the U.S., few studies have examined intimate partner violence (IPV) in interethnic couples. This article examined past-year occurrences of IPV across interethnic and intra-ethnic couples and tested correlates of IPV specifically in interethnic couples. Data were from a national survey of couples 18 years of age and older from the 48 contiguous states. Interethnic couples (n = 116) included partners from different ethnic backgrounds, including black-white, Hispanic-white, and black-Hispanic couples. White (n = 555), black (n = 358), and Hispanic (n = 527) intra-ethnic couples included partners with the same ethnicity. Data analyses were prevalence rates and logistic regressions. The analyses showed that interethnic couples were comparatively younger and had shorter relationships than intra-ethnic white, black, and Hispanic couples.

Male partners in interethnic couples had higher rates of binge drinking and alcohol problems compared to male partners in intra-ethnic couples.

So much for happy mixing. Stock photos lied to me?

Still no mention of racism, so a white male hitting a non-white is okay if you’re married to them? Surely it’s more racist to treat them like breeding sows and sexual concubines.

Past year prevalence rates for any occurrence of IPV and acts of severe IPV were higher for interethnic couples relative to intra-ethnic couples.

Why isn’t this mentioned in Sex Ed?

Most occurrences of IPV for interethnic couples were mutual.

Obedient waifu trope is a myth.

Factors predicting IPV among interethnic couples included marital status, couples’ age, male alcohol problems, and female impulsivity.

Mounting evidence points to interethnic couples as a high risk group for IPV.

Why aren’t there PSAs?

Interethnic couples may be at greater risk for IPV because of their younger age, binge drinking and alcohol problems.

You can’t blame the drink. They drink to have an excuse.

Future research could build on this study by examining cohort effects and regional differences in IPV for interethnic couples, and the risk for IPV across interethnic couples of different ethnic compositions.”

Note: no (non-Hispanic) Asian-White data in this one tested. Hmm.

However, found this:

“Fusco (2010) used county police reports to examine interethnic and intra-ethnic couple differences in IPV for a more diverse community sample of whites, blacks, Asians, and Hispanics. Interethnic couples were more likely than intra-ethnic minority and white couples to have a prior history of IPV and to experience mutual IPV in which both partners were determined by police to be equally involved in perpetrating violence.

No world for submissive waifu.

I guess that’s what happens when you marry someone with higher T than yourself (those manjaws).

White women don’t look like such bitches now, huh?

Victims of IPV in interethnic couples were also at greater risk of being injured during the violence when compared to intra-ethnic couples.

Wages of sin?

Logically, you wouldn’t hold back with the out-group. It’s unconscious.

Diversity + Proximity = Domestic violence, in this case.

This may suggest that interethnic couples engage in more severe acts of partner violence relative to intra-ethnic couples, although Fusco (2010) did not specifically examine partner violence severity.

Wonder why.

So the white guys really do hate their waifu, deep down.
And the Asian woman does hit back (unlike whites).
Why don’t the MRAs ever mention this? Their mutual violence trope is racial, not sexual!

“Couples that included Asian partners or partners from ‘other’ ethnicities (n = 43) were also excluded due to their small sample size in the dataset.”

convenient, considering

For example, white-Asian marriages make up a large percentage of interethnic marriages (Hattery, 2009), but we were not able to include them in this study due to the small number of Asians surveyed.”

I smell bullshit. So they abuse one another but they don’t talk. To save face.

Enough for now. I’ve proven my point.

Modern men’s sexual dysfunction

https://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/unveiling-madonna-whore-complex

Ah, the projection is funny to watch. The woman who slept with two men including them is a “whore” but the speaker at 20+ is as morally, spiritually pure as virgin snow. Pull the other one.

The delusions….

Having a tendency to ruin themselves on cheap types and, once burned out, wonder why they hate decent people as boring and resent good women and marriage.

Orgastic impotence (bad sexuality) intrudes too. Plenty of fuckboy types write long articles online that just telegraph to anyone with a functioning upstairs brain that they’re sexually damaged and incapable of intimacy, physical or emotional (typical of narcissists).

As it applies in the context of relationships in modern times, Madonna-whore complex generally manifests itself after marriage or the birth of a child as Dr. Suraci explains:

“A man may think of his wife as a mother and not an appropriate sex partner.

Conditioning.

He is accustomed to having intercourse with a sexy woman and his wife does not fit the bill.

Rude.

She is now the mother – Madonna. Unconsciously, she may remind him of his mother who cannot be a sexual being,” he said.

Idiotic.

You should be able to divorce for that, the husband has duties. Sexual performance and sexual fidelity, physically and emotionally.

According to Dr. Joel Block, Ph.D., a psychologist who specializes in couples and sex therapy, some of these men have a difficult time committing:

They “stray” to keep their vulnerability in check.

emotional immaturity

Cannot have emotional intimacy.

They are usually unconsciously fearful of getting too attached.  Having a woman on the side gives them a better sense of control.  With all this effort, many guys do start seeing their women, especially in long term relationships, resembling their mom”, he told Alternet.

Then they complain when she files for divorce from the biggest baby.

Ask yourself why cheating is the most common reason for divorce.

Well, it’s better than stoning, isn’t it?

While Stefan is going on about the importance of marriage, special attention needs to go on the basic common sense DON’T CHEAT.

However, Dr. Kanaris says that the disorder is exacerbated in a variety of ways, not necessarily just through affairs, but essentially manifests through the male diverting sexual energy away from the primary relationship

That’s what adultery is.

That’s it.

– such as toward pornography or erotic massage.

Still cheating, seeking physical satisfaction elsewhere. How would they feel if the other spouse did it?

Normalised in this society is not normal.

To look with lust in your heart yada yada.

Stringers vs. winners

For those women who want to marry, common sense advice.
https://www.today.com/health/reason-why-men-marry-some-women-not-others-t74671

“We ran across at least fifty men we could identify as stringers. They can be very dangerous. I estimate each one is responsible for at least two women remaining single. They are destructive because they con women into wasting their time during the years when they are most attractive and most likely to get a proposal. They stay with women, live with women, promise them marriage, and string them on and on indefinitely.”

Breach of promise.

I can change him is my best vapid line. Oh, so he’s a tire?

Signs of an Emotionally Immature Adult

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-superhuman-mind/201611/10-signs-emotionally-immature-adult

Little Prince (or Princess) Syndrome, when it occurs in adulthood, is also known as Peter Pan Syndrome.”
Little Prince (or Princess) Syndrome is related to, but not identical to, Emperor Syndrome, a term is primarily used to describe Chinese boys with no siblings who behave like little tyrants.”

Unfair, Princess Syndrome is more common with the Chinese women at present. You don’t see Chinese men giggling and running round big Chanel stores with their friends on Daddy’s credit card.

“Little Princes and Princesses, as I define them, are grown men or women who act as if they are selfish children, narcissistic teenagers, or irresponsible young adults, and feel entitled to behave as they see fit. Following are 10 traits typical of someone living with Little Prince or Princess Syndrome. (For simplicity’s sake, I use the term Little Prince below, and refer to the role of mothers, not father, but the signs are applicable to all genders.)”

A selection;

He acts like a child, a teenager, or a person who is much younger than he is. He might throw temper tantrums or party all night with people 10 years younger than him.

He acts as if women should serve him. He expects to be taken care of and be pampered on demand. He will happily take but never give.

He cannot maintain a long-term, stable romantic relationship. Former partners end up becoming his enemies or new playmates.

He is commitment-phobic in nearly all areas of life—despite having a needy attachment style. It can take him six months to commit to buying a new sofa.

I have seen that.
My words-
“It’s a sofa, you can dump it.”

They see their possessions as an extension of them.
Possessions include people.

If you don’t make them look good, you’re gone.
The excuse is usually pleasing others, so they also look good to you. B.S.

Btw, Asians invented ghosting. You made less money? You missed a promotion? They forget to send you a dinner party invite. It makes you wonder if they’re capable of the friendship thing with one another too.

He is often passive-aggressive, meaning he has a tendency to engage in an indirect expression of hostility through acts such as subtle insults, sullen behavior, stubbornness, or a deliberate failure to accomplish required tasks.

They are not subtle.
Have you ever met a subtle man?… I rest my case.

He is a narcissist or exhibits a childish selfishness. If something is even mildly inconvenient, he will resist doing it.

Emotional child.

He rarely thinks anything is his fault. He blames everyone around him for everything that goes wrong in his life—even his mother if he can’t find another scapegoat.”

Victim blaming, victim mentality… tendency to complain about victim culture because they think they’re entitled to that pity, not that it’s wrong. Whiny and lots of nagging, like an old woman.

If you find this useful, you might find these too.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/is-america/201601/con-artists-and-their-marks

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-flux/201610/9-classic-traits-manipulative-people

https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201609/meet-the-real-narcissists-theyre-not-what-you-think
“For example, he suggests, some narcissists can be of the “communal” variety and actually devote their lives to helping others. They might even agree with such statements as “I’m the most helpful person I know,” or “I will be known for the good deeds I have done.” “Everyone has met grandiosely altruistic martyrs, self-sacrificing to the point where you can’t stand to be in the room with them,” Malkin says.

And there are highly introverted, or “vulnerable,” narcissists. These individuals feel they are more temperamentally sensitive than others. They react poorly to even gentle criticism and need constant reassurance. The way they feel special might actually be negative: They may see themselves as the ugliest person at the party or feel like a misunderstood genius in a world that refuses to recognize their gifts.”

They can’t back up their claims and if you compare them, they’re usually average. Pointing this out triggers narc rage.

They don’t just ‘use’ others, they use others as…. it’s instrumental.

They cannot self-regulate, they use other people as emotional tampons (especially men) and require excess ‘take’ and their giving is inferior, low quality but they over-value it because *they* are dispensing it. Thinking you’re special is in your actions, not a set of words. Tend to idolize others too, broken perceptions.

Friendzoning man still feels entitlement

It isn’t just men, it isn’t just women, people suck!

http://elitedaily.com/dating/say-to-girl-benched/1725357/

“I mean, granted, I was never ready mentally, emotionally, or financially, but all I needed was time. I’m still not all the way there yet, but I’m ready to work.”

>When men in their thirties claim to be ‘figuring stuff out’ like an immature teenage girl…
Is he going on a juice cleanse? Backpacking round India? Converting to Buddhism? New gym membership? Read a great self-help book about Positive Thinking TM? Starting an online store for supplements?

You’re supposed to have figured out how to adult as a teenager.

When you’re double that age, it’s frankly humiliating.

“One day, I was going to take things seriously. I just wasn’t ready. I’m still not ready, but please don’t move on. I had it all planned out in my head. The timing just wasn’t right, I promise.”

Emotional abuse for $200 aka Let me gaslight you into doubting your own, accurate impression of me and treat you like shit because I wanna get away with being a terrible person.


R-types believe they can have their cake and eat it aka the Have it All lifestyle.
Life is all about timing, either you snatch up the good while it’s there or it will go. Life isn’t a dress rehearsal.

People pair up very quickly by around thirty. It’s like musical chairs in reverse. There are chairs but they’re kinda sticky.

“You knew that one day it would be you and me. So you waited patiently.”

That’s called friendship.
Women don’t wait around like that unless they’re crazy, like creepy men.

Sane people have personal boundaries and don’t allowed themselves to be used.

He thought he was playing her for emotional companionship and later, sex and wifing up, but that friendship was all she wanted. Classic!

“You seem happy. I hope you are because I’m not. I mean I’m happy for you. But I feel like sh*t. That gorgeous smile I see is the product of someone else’s doing.”

Narcissism. Furious that others are having fun without them.

“I can make your smile wider, though! I’m the only one who literally has you dying laughing, adding the extra O’s to your LMAO.”

That is the most 21st century male thing I have ever heard.
Men used to promise to conquer empires, dammit. That is plain pathetic.

He’s not even offering to cook her dinner.

SOME-THING.

I think this is why she was relieved he kept it at a friendship level.
She dodged 7 bullets out of a 6-chamber gun.

Women notice how you treat us, I covered this in detail. If we’re your friend and see other women being treated like shit, the sexual attraction DIES. RIP. NEVER COMING BACK. This is why we have the higher EQ.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/10/19/women-notice-how-you-treat-the-rest-of-us/

“It’s my bad. I waited too long. I played around. I thought you would always be there. I took you for granted. I’m sorry.”

False remorse, yep. *checks off list*

https://www.drgeorgesimon.com/shame-guilt-regret-remorse-and-contrition/
“By definition, character-impaired folks have deficient or sometimes even absent consciences. So, genuine remorse is usually not in their vocabulary when they do things that hurt others. They might well have some regret for the practical consequences of their actions, but that’s not at all the same as being remorseful. And, because they are predisposed to use their typical ways of coping (e.g., denying, lying, “justifying,”blaming, etc.) to deal with situational stressors, while they might experience momentary regret over an adverse consequence of their behavior, they usually only dig in their heels and become more determined than ever to have their way, primarily because they lack remorse. That’s precisely why they don’t seem to learn from experience. They actually do learn, and learn plenty. They just don’t learn the lessons we’d like them to learn. It’s because of their lack of remorse that they don’t re-assess their general approach to things and seriously consider modifying their style…”

They learn to fuck you over better next time.

Guilt is feeling bad about something you’ve done, whereas shame is feeling bad about who you are. The popular wisdom for some time has been that guilt is both essential and often helpful to moral functioning but shame is to be avoided because it’s counterproductive at best or outright toxic at worst. Some folks have extended the meaning of shame to include feelings of humiliation, embarrassment, or disgrace. But shame is not synonymous with any of these things (Words have to have meanings and it’s important to distinguish terms). And only recently have some researchers bucked the long popular trend by presenting evidence that some shame can indeed be good.”

He’d love to claim she cheated – on what, is the question begged.

To get this straight as a ruler;

guilt > for actions

shame > for persons

embarrassment > temporary, minor

humiliation > major, self-involved

disgraced > permanent, major, social damage to reputation

e.g. If you cheat on your spouse they are humiliated, if the neighbours find out they are also disgraced.

“Deep down, I’m hoping it doesn’t work out. I’m hoping he messes up — not to the point that he hurts you or to the point that you become bitter and maybe even take it out on me.”

translation:

me me me me me me me me me
but I care about you

This is why women have such concepts as toxic people and frenemies.
They hurt and sabotage you.

“But even worse than all of that is the fact that I’m old, lonely, and full of regret.”

Not her fault.

Come home when you get a chance. I’ll be here.”

Oh, fuck off.

Maybe.”

Kill yourself.

Please.

I didn’t edit that either, it really is that shallow. Check.

Easy men are not hard to get, they don’t get to play hard to get. Coyness is not attractive in a man, it’s commitment phobia. That’s the feminine role.

His earlier article:

http://elitedaily.com/dating/real-reason-guys-bench-girls/1542893/

“Benching”-when men friendzone wife material to pursue slags on the Pussy Parade but don’t want to admit to friendzoning.

“Some girls might call this a fuckboy activity or whatever.”
r-types.

#shudder

Don’t describe me as I am.

“There was never any pressure. Whenever we did link up, we had a non-sexual good time.”

They feel sexually entitled to everything – including platonic friends.
It’s like the so-called alpha widow or a retired porn star.
‘I’m damaged but you should want me even more because blah blah blah magic cheat code word experience.’
Mental damage is certainly an experience.
Bad relationships teach you bad lessons, abusive ones.

To continue seeking out other shitty people (his level) shows he learnt nothing after the first one.

Fool me once…

Once is a mistake, twice, a choice.

“…………….Bench carefully.”

He doesn’t tell men not to, he says not to keep stringing good women along for too long.
What an absolute POS.
Yes, he deserves to be alone.

I’ve seen too many good women lap this bullshit up and wonder why they get cheated on, married.

You can’t change him, you haven’t changed him, this isn’t a fairytale.

These posts are a PSA in avoiding crazy.

A shrink on sexual harassment “can’t you take a compliment?”

It’s odd how men will admit women are sensitive about their appearance then continue to attack us on it.

Yeah, that’s bullying. Even in school, that is not flirting.

A delightful, common sense explanation.

In before autism;

If you DON’T ‘believe’ in sexual harassment – go to a gay bar on a Saturday.

See how long you last.

That is a woman’s life.

Men are lecherous pigs, regardless of sexuality. What does a lecherous woman look like? A man.

Since any reading this and disbelieving are cowards, simply ask every woman you know and care about (assuming any stuck around you) about their experiences. There are always experiences, regardless of ‘age’ and seeming ‘fuckability’. Don’t talk over them excusing it, just ask the question, shut up and listen.

Actually, 9/10 male rudeness is the inability to shut up and listen. There are studies.

OT Rape accusations imply guilt. A totally honest man needn’t fear them.

https://www.jeunesepayne.co.uk/single-post/2016/11/07/Sexual-Harassment-%E2%80%9CCan%E2%80%99t-you-take-a-compliment%E2%80%9D

“When someone shouts across the street at me “show us your cunt”, or even just wolf-whistles, it’s not because they think it’s going to make me feel good.

It’s a reminder that they could overpower and attack you. R-types don’t care for rule of law, Ks are respectful (either ignoring you in public or getting introductions the decent way).
I saw a very right-wing blog post an article about how the author could easily rape any woman he likes.
In quite graphic detail and practically frothing at the prospect. I don’t read that blog anymore.
This was supposed to scare us all straight (and into agreement with him).

Rape isn’t funny to women, it appalls us (ESPECIALLY the conservative ones), it’s worse than murder. Imagine getting castrated, male power stripped and stolen. Rape is worse for women, at the very least for the conception aspect. A man joking about rape is an r-type trying to pass for K (strong). Those are the worst.

When women see a man seriously laugh (not from shock, but enjoyment) at domestic abuse or whatever sexual ‘prank’ is going on, it would be like watching a woman laughing at a man gored on barbed wire in WW1. Our thought is always the same: what if that were me?

This is why women choose compassion in mate selection studies.

Which sex has the blacker humour?

“Can’t you take a joke?”

Is civilization a joke? They make me wonder.

This is why the right wing’s reputation suffers. Manwhores cosplaying Patriarchy. They seem to think it means concubines and slavery, rather than monogamy and industry.

As for the genuine conservatives…

If they can’t fuck it or kill it, they’re probably going to insult it.

It’s not a well-intended or genuine interaction. They’re not even under some misguided impression that such comments will make me want to have sex with them.

Some are truly that stupid.

Thought process as follows:

If I make her hate me, it’ll remind her of my mother/her father.

Presuming all fathers are incompetent (r-selected) as his. Another layer of insult.

Resent women? No! I simply happen to crush and abandon them all by sheer coincidence!
Distrust women? Sure! They made me leave them! Projection’s only real when women do it!

It’s simply an exertion of power. The aim is to get approval or laughter from others, and discomfort or gratitude from me.

That is better known as sadism.

It is caused by degenerate media, especially the supernormal stimuli of HD streaming online porn.
I guarantee you 100% of those males are porn addicts, the female leches too. The testosterone has to go somewhere, they lack the impulse control (hypofrontality) and time preference to do something good with it.

A compliment is something you would feel comfortable giving a man, woman, or child because you believe it would make them feel good. You’re not boosting anyone’s self-esteem by reminding them that, by society’s standards, “you look acceptable enough for me to fuck”.”

There is always the insult that your primary value is whether they’d use you as their whore.

They’re calling you a whore.

That’s what no woman will admit.

You’re soliciting women on the street. As a whore. But at least whores can charge.

They refuse to accept they’re being rude but they wouldn’t say it if children were present. They desperately want attention but project this onto the provocateur (and looking good isn’t an excuse for anything, is it?) although differing tastes apply, so you can’t even hide your attractiveness since they’ll always be someone Into That. [cough pervert cough]
In conclusion, blame porn. Speaking to people like that (a whore) might not even be acceptable in a purely sexual, private interaction. If they’re smart, they’d leave immediately. It’s demeaning, dehumanizing and morally bankrupt, like the source.

Provocateur is a word I use deliberately… it’s never applied to men, is it?
There’s no such thing as Adam Teasing and Taharrush ‘games’ go after… which sex?

Misandrist women avoid men but misogynistic men seek out women.

Hello, the bulk of MGTOW.

They seek women out to punish them [1]  for what is perceived (projection) as the other’s wrongdoing. It’s never them, never examine the self!!!

Sexual predators, sexual sadism.

I guess womb envy comes into it somewhere but mention that after they play the feminist ‘Penis Envy’ record for the millionth time and suddenly the concept might be shaky? [SJWs lie, r-types lie, logic is a lie to them, thinking is K]

1 Who are you? You can’t lose the chub and get a good job, get out of anyone’s face. At least join a church or Greeenpeace or something. A useful Crusade.

I know, I know.

“Yes, but –

What about men?”

…What about the men?

Where are the men when this happens? [2]

Women exist, women are the fair sex. Women will be sexually harassed as long as we live. Men need to police other men, we certainly can’t.

Think too of the racial and class angles.

Is this acceptable as a way to treat people in the first world?

2

Sign of an r-type male: when you defend a woman from attack (and attack it is), you get accused of White Knighting. Yes, but White Knights are a good thing (Ks) and protect other Ks from monsters…

They never speak to men that way, knowing the odds of an altercation. Cowards to boot. Sexual competition makes the rabbit flee. At times, they’ll use the term incorrectly (in defense of another r) as a compliment of her sexual quality (lie) to get her into bed. It uses triangulation, the common manipulation tactic. Are those men crazy? Probably male borderline, it’s under-diagnosed. It would explain their romantic or intimacy issues that can be masked socially to some extent. R-types fear intimacy because it leads to responsibility and commitment, turn-offs. R/K does neatly align with attachment conditions (anxious-avoidant, secure)…. with the Mother (Freud wins).

Another sign “why are women so easily offended?” [3]

Only the ones around you.

Hm.

Yes, it’s definitely us…

all three billion of us, currently. And they say women can’t do maths?

3

Prelude to gaslighting, All women are crazy bullshit. Pathologizing a problem makes it go away!

See also the classic “why won’t women-” do whatever Lord Fauntleroy wants?

Narcissistic entitlement brewing up to rage. Histrionic, effete rage.